Blog Due 25/03/2012

Are we really measuring what we intend to?

A few weeks ago, I took part in an experiment through SONA and a thought arose that I decided to blog about. This blog will be considering whether psychologists are ever measuring real life behaviours of just perceptions of these behaviours.

The experiment I took part in required me to play a computer game for 20 minutes followed by a few short tasks/questionnaires. The thing I realised while I was completing the computer game was that half way through I became very thirsty and actually thought “If this wasn’t an experiment, I would just pause the game and go get myself a drink”. And then it occured to me that even though I was trying my absolute best in the experiment, I was definitely not giving the experimenter ‘true’ scores as I knew for a fact that I would not have completed the exercise in the same way had I been at home. I also became aware of the fact that I was trying exceptionally hard to do ‘well’ at the game; more so than if I had been playing it by my own accord. This then left me a bit concerned as by doing my best I was making it less likely that the scores would be truly accurate, but at the same time not trying my best just felt wrong.

So something as simple as being a bit thirsty made me wonder if we can ever measure the behaviour someone would do in the ‘real world’. This article provides a lovely explanation as to psychology’s measurement problem. Are we ever really measuring what we are intending to?

When we conduct studies it is difficult to control every confounding variable possible (such as someone being a bit thirsty part way through the experiment) so how can we be certain that we are measuring the intended variable and nothing else.

So perhaps we should just take results from the behaviours that we can see in real life. But taking results from observations also has it’s own huge problems. As well as some observation techniques being arguably subjective, when a person knows that they are being watched do they change their behaviours – whether on purpose or not? But what if we measure behaviours without participants knowing; would covert observations fix this problem? Observations in which participants are unaware of their participation can have huge issues in terms of ethics ( Although the term ‘spying’ may be going a little far, covert observations do pry on the lives of participants somewhat and I personally would not feel comfortable with someone taking notes about any aspect of my life without my prior consent.

A comforting thought is when many participants are involved in a study, the effects of most confounding variables tend to average out, especially if the results of a control group is also analysed.

So even though research methods may have their slight flaws, overall, they do what they need to.


Pictures from:
Rat cartoon:
Control group:


Homework for my TA – 14/03/2012

Comment 1:


Comment 2:


Comment 3:


Comment 4:


Thankyou! 🙂

Blog due 11/03/2012

Gap Between Psychology Theories and their Application?

This week, my blog is going to discuss whether there is a gap between the theories psychology puts forward as scientifically significant and there use in practical life. For example, Cognitive Psychologists have huge amounts of research about how memory works but are these theories put to use in education to help children with their times tables or spelling? Also, are Developmental theories used to ensure that children are given all the possible tools to grow up in the ‘best’ way possible?

There are many theories about why some people often exceed the recommended maximum amount of alcohol they drink. Recently, a study has proposed that two-thirds of a sample of 18-25 year olds could not accurately identify the correct amount of units of alcohol in their regular drinks ( This information could be hugely beneficial as it means that many people may not even realised they may be drinking too much. However, the information is no use if nothing is going to be done about it (such as a campaign about the correct amounts of units).

Clinical theories should be available to everyone in an attempt to prevent some disorders rather than just giving people treatments after they have been diagnosed. According to this report soldiers are not recieving the help they need until long after they are diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder. With this disorder it is important to catch it early ( and so with more methods put in place to prevent it rather than treat it, there could be fewer people suffering as much. This later diagnosis could also mean that there are more people out there who are suffering but have not yet been identified so may not receive help in time.

But is the gap really that big? Is the best being done with the resources available?

Psychology is a huge field of research with few limits as every aspect of human behaviour is under inspection in some parts of psychology ( With such a huge area of expertise there are bound to be a few cases in which the findings are not immediately, directly applied to real life. However, with the most crucial of findings, changes are seen quickly and often other findings find their place in society after a while.

Dating sites (, at least, seem to be taking psychological theories ‘to heart’…

Psychology, as a science, should benefit everyone, which means we must attempt to find it a place in every day life.


Picture from: